If Star Trek Beyond fails
- Thread starter Dales
- Start date
- Status
Just the same, though -- and don't get me wrong, I'm usually defending STID wherever I go, I like it a lot -- Deadline's estimate that the movie made $29.9 million in profits at the box office when all expenses are calculated (marketing) is somewhat anemic, isn't it? Although I've read that it's done pretty well for itself on home video, streaming, et al. But I would think Paramount would have liked to have had three digits in those millions in first-run profit, not two.
Well, fair enough!
You did look at how many actual people rated Into Darkness? 303,000.
What the Hell. If 303,000 isn't enough for you. What about 3,000,000?
Those three million on Netflix scored it roughly the same as those three hundred-thousand on Rotten Tomatoes. Of course, no one liked it and it was all a lie orchestrated by Bad Robot.
A
Amaris
Guest
You did look at how many actual people rated Into Darkness? 303,000.
What the Hell. If 303,000 isn't enough for you. What about 3,000,000?
Those three million on Netflix scored it roughly the same as those three hundred-thousand on Rotten Tomatoes. Of course, no one liked it and it was all a lie orchestrated by Bad Robot.
But that leaves 315 million people in the U.S. who didn't like it! Ah HA! Failure!
And everyone knows that 50 "real fans" matter more that 3 million general viewers.
And, yes, that's sarcasm.
The sad thing is that there are people that actually believe that. They'll hold up that poll that had 100 participates as some iron clad barometer of what a terrible movie Into Darkness is, yet ignore sites where thousands and millions of people vote.
Hell, even here a majority rated it as a 'B-' or above (76.06%).
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=209857
And everyone knows that 50 "real fans" matter more that 3 million general viewers.
And, yes, that's sarcasm.
The sad thing is that there are people that actually believe that. They'll hold up that poll that had 100 participates as some iron clad barometer of what a terrible movie Into Darkness is, yet ignore sites where thousands and millions of people vote.
Hell, even here a majority rated it as a 'B-' or above (76.06%).
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=209857
And Trek fans are FAR more critical of STID than the general public.
Interestingly, the blu-ray release got 4.4 (63% gave it 5, 22% gave it 4). Almost all of the negative reviews were generated by gripes over Paramount's "special features" shenanigans. The very reviews that were actually critical of the MOVIE were relatively few and even include a fair number of the usual TrekBBS flame warriors. One of whom, incidentally, has been pushing the theory that all the positive Amazon reviews are fake.
One of these days I'm going to open my Blu-Ray copy. I will.
Seeing the darn flick six or seven times in theaters and then again when a date selected it on Netflix has just really burned me out. The Blu-Ray is still nicely wrapped.
Great movie though. Third or so favorite of 'em. I still like VI and 09 somewhat more is all.
Seeing the darn flick six or seven times in theaters and then again when a date selected it on Netflix has just really burned me out. The Blu-Ray is still nicely wrapped.
Great movie though. Third or so favorite of 'em. I still like VI and 09 somewhat more is all.
I actually like The Motion Picture and The Undiscovered Country more than either of the Abrams films.
It feels like some people believe they are betraying what came before by liking the newer movies.
Haha, yup.
I promise I won't tell Julian or B'Elanna. They'd be heartbroken.
I promise I won't tell Julian or B'Elanna. They'd be heartbroken.
I just wanna see the fucking movie. If it's good, it's good. If it sucks, oh well.
Just a goddamned movie.
Just a goddamned movie.
Both started out on TV.
Both lost their original creator.
Both have other people inheriting the roles.
Muppets going back to TV has won a lot of buzz because a lot of people think it belongs there, and there's a similar contingent of Trek fans who feel likewise about Trek.
I mean, OK, I get that, but it's Muppets. I really don't intend to sound totally ignorant on this and I'm fine admitting I've never exactly looked this stuff up -- and I have a lot of respect for the hard work that goes into that production -- but I can't imagine The Muppets back on TV is going to cost the boatloads of money Trek would.
I wonder if superhero movies will suffer from the same glut as Trek did in the 90s? That's the advantage of just having one movie every few years - it's more of an event. It's the pause that refreshes!I do not think it will bomb too, we never know but 90% chance that it wont bomb. Also seeing how Jurassic park and furious 7 made so much money people make be looking for better alternatives to the 5 comics films coming out in the spring summer period alone and star trek beyond will be just what people need.
I don't see how STB can truly flop. At worst it might "disappoint" alla STID, but it'll make its money back. Unlike the Spiderman reboot, I think there is a lot of good will toward these actors as these characters, and the general sense of fun the NuTrek movies have had so far. I imagine that the tagline "From the director of Fast & Furious" will put an extra $30 mil in the box office on its own.
If there is a perceived need to "re-tool", I don't think they'll do more than get a new director, maybe do some stunt-casting, and make a big deal about how the new one won't have whatever the marketing people say was wrong with the old one (no talking frogs! less of the colour orange!). Actually, that's what they're doing with the current one...
I'm pretty sure that a flop would reduce the chances of Trek returning to TV, not increase them. Possibly a canny producer might see an opportunity to get a Clone Wars-style show to market.
I can see a nightmarish possibility of Trek being reincarnated as a Zucker brothers-style low farce. "...featuring Kim Kardashian as the first Armenian ass-tronaut!"
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
